ReviewJournal of physical therapy science2025
Measurement properties of observational gait analysis in patients with stroke: a systematic review.
Review in Journal of physical therapy science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
[Purpose] This study aimed to conduct a systematic review the measurement properties of standardized observational gait analysis (OGA) tools for patients with stroke. [Participants and Methods] A systematically search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and PEDro databases using stroke- and gait-related keywords. No time restrictions were applied. Studies evaluating OGA using gait analysis tools were included. The methodological quality of the selected studies was assessed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. [Results] A total of eighteen studies utilizing four gait analysis tools were identified. Sixteen studies employed video-based measurements. The GAIT and WGS tools were assessed for reliability, validity, responsiveness, and interpretability. However, the overall methodological quality of these assessments was not rated as high. [Conclusion] Video-based OGA holds significant potential for clinical applications, but several challenges remain to be met. Standardizing video recording protocols and measurement methods are essential and additional research is needed to determine the qualifications and expertise of the evaluators. Although some studies have shown video-based OGA are effective, determining clinically relevant indicators, such as the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID), is necessary to enhance its applicability in clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.